Thirdly, what this claim shows is that the commonplace approach of the neoliberal, which is to take a micro situation and extrapolate it to the macro environment, implicitly assuming that this is a valid basis for reasoning, is totally misplaced. Unfortunately, almost all microeconomic theory is created on this basis, with the exception of things like modern monetary theory and the economics that people like Steve Keen promote.
What he means is that he doesn’t want macroeconomics to have a microeconomic base. There’s some level of aggregation where entirely different rules come into play that is. The reason he – and Keen etc – want this is because it’s blindingly obvious that a lot of mocroeconomic observations are true. But that they militate against the sort of macroeconomics that they want to do. Therefore it must be true that the true microeconomics – marginal tax rates, the absence of central knowledge, etc etc – must be somehow wrong at the level of aggregation they want to work at.
Unfortunately, almost all microeconomic theory is created on this basis,
He actually means, unfortunately almost all macroeconomic theory is created….he manages to get tied up in his own rant.
Easily done though, cough “Mocroeconomics” cough 🙂
Macroeconomics? The poor cousin of astrology, isn’t it?
The title of his immediate previous blog, posted only one day earlier is:
“Peace on Earth, goodwill to all people. Is it too much to ask for?”
There are a number of personal insults directed at the person who is the subject of this blog, which is apparently how Murphy interprets “goodwill to all people”.
In a similar vein, may I extend my goodwill to Murphy by wishing him a very Long Covid New Year.
@ BraveFart
When I was young the translation that I preferred was “and peace on earth to men of goodwill” – which seemed the more logical and plausible (the more so when “peace” has overtones of “Shalom”) – *that* may not be too much to hope for.
mocroeconomics: economics for mokes.
That makes sense here…